FACTORS INFLUENCING USE OF ALTERNATIVE ......International Academic Journal of Information Sciences and Project Management | Volume 3, Issue 4, pp. 572-602 574 | P a g e opportunities

International Academic Journal of Information Sciences and Project Management | Volume 3, Issue 4, pp. 572-602

572 | P a g e

FACTORS INFLUENCING USE OF ALTERNATIVE

DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN CONSTRUCTION

PROJECTS: CASE OF IMENTI NORTH SUB COUNTY,

MERU COUNTY

Hiram Kirimi

Master of Arts in Project Planning and Management, University of Nairobi, Kenya

Dr. John Wanjohi

Department of Chemistry, University of Nairobi, Kenya

©2019

International Academic Journal of Information Sciences and Project Management

(IAJISPM) | ISSN 2519-7711

Received: 30th July 2019

Accepted: 9th August 2019

Full Length Research

Available Online at:

http://www.iajournals.org/articles/iajispm_v3_i4_572_602.pdf

Citation: Kirimi, H. & Wanjohi, J. (2019). Factors influencing use of alternative dispute

resolution in construction projects: Case of Imenti North Sub County, Meru County.

International Academic Journal of Information Sciences and Project Management, 3(4),

572-602


573 | P a g e

ABSTRACT

Regarded as a frequent occurrence, disputes

in construction projects occasioned by

substandard communication of impractical

clients’ expectations, defective works and

delays in architectural designs significantly

contribute to adverse effects on project

results. Despite these and the numerous

demerits linked to litigation majority of

clients, contractors and construction

consultants in Kenya still opt for it as

opposed to Alternative Dispute Resolution

(ADR) approaches to resolve disputes in

construction projects. The purpose of this

study was to establish the factors influencing

use of alternative dispute resolution in

construction projects in Imenti North Sub-

County, Meru County, Kenya. In particular

it examined the influence of: lack of

awareness, preservation of business

relationships, cost minimization and

communication and documentation issues on

the use of ADR in construction projects

disputes. The research was guided by two

theories; Theory of Planned Behavior and

Transaction Cost Economics Theory and

will be support by the Stair-Step Model of

Dispute Resolution. The research embraced

use of descriptive survey research design.

Target population is of 255 respondents. The

sample size was of 45 (n=45), Contractors,

12 (n=12) Consultants (Architectures,

Quantity Surveyors and Structural

Engineers) and Construction Projects Clients

75 (n=75) that was singled out to take part in

the investigation. Stratified sampling and

Simple random sampling were made use of

to pick the sampled subjects. Questionnaires

were used to collect primary data in the

study locale. Data was analyzed

qualitatively and quantitatively by

employing SPSS version 22.0, it was then

presented in Frequency and Percentage

tables and a multivariate regression model

used. The study found that scarcity of

knowledge on mediation does influence use

of alternative dispute resolution in

construction projects disputes. The study

found that reduced adversarial attitudes and

hostility between client, contractor, quantity

surveyor and architecture influence use of

alternative dispute resolution in construction

projects disputes. The study also found that

elimination of litigation costs influences use


construction projects disputes. The study

also found that privacy of the proceedings

influences use of alternative dispute

resolution in construction projects disputes.

The study concluded that preservation of

business relationships had the greatest

influence on use of alternative dispute

resolution in construction projects in Imenti

North, followed by costs minimization,

followed by communication and

documentation issues while lack of

awareness had the least influence on the use


construction projects in Imenti North. The

study recommended that there was need for

high profile public promotional campaigns.

The campaigns would need to be continuous

since most users of ADR services tend to

believe that they are one-off users who may

never again have a significant land dispute.

The study also recommends that supplies

should be exhaustively elaborated and

detailed in the contract conditions, designs

and specifications i.e. nullify, if possible,


574 | P a g e

opportunities for differing interpretations of

the requirements of the documents.

Key Words: alternative dispute resolution,

construction projects, Imenti North Sub

County, Meru County

INTRODUCTION

According to Blake, Browne and Sime, (2014) Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is a

collection of normally discretional or intentional private procedures of conflict resolution

approaches employed with the aim of settling conflicts or disputes. These include; dispute

resolution/review boards (DRBs), expert determination, mediation, adjudication, arbitration and

negotiation (Tolson, 2017). Informed by their inherent merits especially those related to costs

and time, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) approaches are becoming common in settling

construction projects disputes (Chan, 2014). In United States of America (USA) Harrison (2011),

reported the need for cost minimization and that of preservation of business relationships

significantly influenced the use of ADR in resolving construction projects disputes.

In Russia, Yaskova and Zaitseva (2017) reported lack of awareness on alternative dispute

resolution (ADR) particularly on its application procedures significantly influenced its use in

solving construction projects disputes. In the Czech Republic, Nabatova (2017) established

communication and documentation issues influenced the use of ADR in settling of construction

projects disputes. In United Kingdom (U.K), Safinia (2014) observed the need for preservation

of business relationships and cost minimization resulted to the significant use of ADR in settling

construction projects disputes. Further, lack of awareness on ADR particularly on arbitration

limited its use to solve construction projects disputes in Germany as compared to those in

Sweden (Magg and Schmitt, 2010).

In Australia, Gill, Gray, Skitmore and Callaghan (2015) report cost minimization and the need

for preservation of business relationships predominantly influenced the use of alternative dispute

resolution (ADR) to address construction projects disputes. Additionally, in her study, She

(2011) reported communication and documentation issues that affected operations of Dispute

Review Boards (DRBs) led to most disputes in the construction industry settled using litigation

which significantly influenced the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in Australia.

Further, in New Zealand Gillies (2015) communication and documentation issues coupled with

the need to preserve business relationships significantly influenced use of ADR in solving

construction projects disputes.

In Malaysia, Barough, Shoubi and Preece (2013) observed the need to reduce costs and time

linked to litigation influenced the use of ADR in solving of disputes in construction projects. In

Sri Lanka, Gunasena (2010) report the need for preservation of business relationship and cost

minimization significantly influenced the use of ADR in solving of disputes in construction

projects. In Pakistan, Farooqui, Umer and Lodi (2012) lack of awareness on ADR and its

inherent benefits did significantly limit its use in the solving of construction projects.

Additionally, the need to preserve business relationship and documentation issues were identified


575 | P a g e

to have significantly influenced use of ADR in solving of disputes in construction projects in

Indonesia (Kurniawan 2015).

Lack of awareness on alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in the construction industry

influenced its adoption in the settling of disputes in construction projects in Kuwait (Sayed-

Gharib, Lord and Price 2011). In Saudi Arabia, Alshahrani (2017) reported lack of awareness on

ADR coupled with communication and documentation issues resulted to the preferred use of

litigation which significantly influenced the adoption of ADR in settling of disputes in

construction projects. In the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Zeidan (2015) reported the need to

cut down costs associated with litigation emanating from time used resulting to project overruns

influenced the use of ADR in solving disputes in construction projects.

In Nigeria, Idowu, Ogunbiyi and Hungbo (2015) reported lack of awareness on alternative

dispute resolution (ADR) had significantly influenced its use in construction projects disputes.

Ezeokoli and Ugochukwu (2018) established cost minimization and the need to maintain

business relationships worked as critical factors that significantly influenced use of ADR in

resolving construction projects’ disputes in Nigeria. Similarly, in Ghana Kodwo (2017),

observed the need to realize cost minimization related with litigation and preservation of

business relationships as critical factors that significantly influenced the use of ADR to solve

disputes within construction projects.

In South Africa, Maiketso and Maritz (2012) report lack of awareness on alternative dispute

resolution (ADR) especially among industry practitioners and their clients influenced its

adoption in the settling of disputes that relate to construction projects. In Swaziland, Mashwama,

Aigbovboa and Thwala (2015) observed the need to realize cost minimization and that of

preservation of business relationships resulted to the significant use of ADR in solving disputes

in construction projects. Further, Musonda and Muya (2011) reported lack of awareness and

minimal knowledge on benefits limited adoption of ADR significantly influencing its use in

solving construction projects disputes in Zambia.

In Egypt, Elziny, Mohamadien, Ibrahim and Abdel Fattah (2014) report communication and

documentation issues in terms of the linking of construction contracts with alternative dispute

resolution (ADR) influenced its use in settling construction projects disputes. However,

Marzouk, El-Mesteckawi and El-Said (2011) had observed the need to realized benefits a cost

minimization through adoption of ADR as the critical factor that significantly influenced its use

in settling disputes in construction projects in Egypt. Further, the need to realize cost

minimization and that of preservation of business relationships worked as critical factors that

influenced use of ADR in solving of construction projects disputes in Ethiopia (Getahun,

Macarubbo and Mosisa, 2016). In Uganda, Mulolo, Alinaitwe and Mwakali (2015) report

communication and documentation issues coupled with the need for cost minimization were the

critical factors that influenced use of ADR in settling of construction projects disputes.

https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/2074080613_H_M_Musonda

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/M_Muya


576 | P a g e

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The predominant goal of parties to construction projects at their outset is fluid running of the

same to their completion. However, dissimilar purposes of groups involved and the inherent

complexity of construction projects that are often characterized by substandard communication

of impractical clients’ expectations, defective works and delays in architectural designs results to

contractual conflicts. These disputes in most cases lead to diverse claims from parties involved

whose attempt to resolve them usually results to litigation; a very expensive and time consuming

undertaking. Despite these demerits and others associated to it, the continued utilization of

litigation especially in Africa is attributable to limited knowledge on existence of Alternative

Dispute Resolution (ADR). In Kenya, the continued use of litigation in settling disputes related

to construction projects has continually led to both a backlog of cases in the judiciary and images

of stalled expensive projects. Litigation which is considered an adversarial approach; lacks in

privacy and is characterized by unending court hearings has also significantly contributed to

damaged business relationships in the construction industry. Notwithstanding, in Imenti North

Sub County also the level of utilization of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in resolving

construction projects’ disputes is still wanting (National Construction Authority (NCA), 2017).

This has substantially been attributed to failure by both clients and practitioners in the

construction industry to appreciate the efficient and effective nature of ADR in resolving

disputes resulting also to stalled construction projects (NCA, 2017). Further, non-existence of

trainings by the judiciary and government construction authorities has also impeded the adoption

of ADR. Subsequently, the current research study seeks to investigate critical factors influencing

use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in settling construction projects’ disputes.

Specifically, this research investigated on the influence of; lack of awareness, preservation of

business relationships, cost minimization and communication and documentation issues on use

of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects disputes.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of the study was to establish factors influencing use of alternative dispute resolution

in construction projects in Imenti North Sub County, Meru County.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1. To determine the extent to which lack of awareness on alternative dispute resolution

influences its use in construction projects in Imenti North;

2. To establish how preservation of business relationships influences the use of alternative

dispute resolution in construction projects in Imenti North;

3. To assess the extent to which cost minimization influences the use of alternative dispute

resolution in construction projects in Imenti North;


577 | P a g e

4. To examine how communication and documentation issues influence the use of

alternative dispute resolution in construction projects in Imenti North;

LITERATURE REVIEW

Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution in Construction Projects

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is prominent in managing disputes in construction

projects. In a study, Callum (2013) observed ADR was gaining popularity in construction

projects in United Kingdom (U.K). Specifically, he asserts arbitration and mediation were more

preferred than adjudication because of their duration in proceedings (Callum 2013).Similarly, in

their study Scherer and Moss (2014) established there was an increased use of ADR in

construction projects in Switzerland. Further, they argued this predominantly emanated from

advantages associated with ADR approaches such as duration of proceedings and irrevocability

of settlements (Scherer and Moss, 2014).

Wong (2011) established ADR had gained popularity in construction projects in Sri Lanka. In

particular, he argued because of its nature of ensuring irrevocability of settlement, adjudication

had been increasingly used in construction projects (Wong, 2011).Lee (2017) established there

was an increase in the use of ADR in construction projects in Malaysia. Specifically, he asserts

construction projects in the country had witnessed an increased use of negotiation and mediation

due to the inherent merits of the two procedure that allow a short duration in settling disputes

(Lee, 2017).

Keršuliene, Zavadskas and Turskis, (2010) established that lack of awareness presented a

substantial adverse influence on decisions to embrace alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in

resolving disputes in construction projects in Lithuania. Specifically, they assert scarcity of

knowledge in the negotiation, mediation, conciliation and arbitration processes significantly

contributed to the limited use of these ADR approaches in settling construction projects’ disputes

(Keršuliene et al., 2010). Similarly, Tazelaar and Snijders (2010) found evidence demonstrating

that lack of awareness had significantly influenced the use of ADR in determining disputes in

construction projects in both Netherlands and Germany. In particular, they assert minimal

understanding of the advantages of the conciliation and mediation processes and lack of

knowledge on how to effectively undertake arbitration proceedings significantly contributed to

most disputes in construction projects resolved using litigation as opposed to ADR (Tazelaar and

Snijders, 2010). However, Spillane et al., (2011) observed concerted efforts to develop

awareness on had presented a substantial positive influence on use of ADR in determining

disputes in construction projects in Ireland. Additionally, they assert awareness workshops,

conference and seminars on mediation had significantly contributed to the embracing of this

ADR method in settling of conflicts in construction projects (Spillane et al., 2011).


578 | P a g e

In their study, Hussin and Ismail (2015) found evidence postulating that lack of awareness had

significantly influenced use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in resolving conflicts in

construction projects in Malaysia. Additionally, they observed the scarcity of knowledge in

mediation had resulted to limited use of this ADR method in settling of conflicts in construction

projects (Hussin and Ismail, 2015). Similarly, Sarmiento (2013) asserts lack of awareness had a

substantial adverse influence on decision to embrace ADR in settling disputes emerging in

construction projects in the Philippines. Further, he argued scarcity of knowledge on meditation,

minimal knowledge on conciliation and insufficiency of understanding of arbitration negatively

influenced the use of these ADR methods in resolving construction disputes (Sarmiento, 2013).

In their study, Khekale and Futane (2015) also established lack of awareness presented a

significant adverse influence on use of ADR in settling disputes in construction projects in India.

In particular, they assert minimal knowledge on conciliation, mediation and negotiation had a

considerable contribution to the limited embracing of these ADR methods in solving

construction disputes (Khekale and Futane, 2015).

Almutairi, (2015) observed lack of awareness on the possibility of embracing alternative dispute

resolution (ADR) in determining disputes in construction projects had led to an adverse influence

on its use in Saudi Arabia. Specifically, he asserts scarcity of knowledge in the mediation

process, inadequacy of understanding in negotiation and minimal knowledge on how to carryout

conciliation proceedings significantly contributed to the limited use of these ADR methods in

determining construction disputes (Almutairi, 2015). Similarly, Sayed-Gharib, Price and Lord,

(2010) asserts lack of awareness had significantly limited the use of ADR in resolving disputes

emerging in construction projects in Kuwait. In particular, they contend that the existence of

minimal knowledge on how to conduct conciliation proceedings and insufficient understanding

of arbitration, negotiation and mediation negatively influenced decisions to adopt these ADR

methods in determining disputes in construction projects (Sayed-Gharib, et al., 2010). However,

Saeb, Mohd Danuri, Zakaria and Mohamed (2019) found evidence demonstrating that efforts to

create awareness had presented a substantial positive influence on use of ADR in determining

disputes in construction projects in Iran. Additionally, they assert awareness seminars and

workshops had played a pivotal role in disseminating and enhancing knowledge on negotiation,

mediation, arbitration and importance of Dispute Review Boards (DRBs) in determining

construction disputes (Saeb, et al., 2019).

In his study, Onukwube (2011) found evidence demonstrating lack of awareness significantly

influenced embracing of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) for the resolving of disputes in

construction projects in Nigeria. Specifically, he notes minimal knowledge on conciliation,

inadequacy of knowledge in negotiation and insufficiency of understanding of arbitration had a

substantial contribution to the limited use of these ADR methods in settling disputes in

construction projects (Onukwube, 2011).Similarly, Baffour-Awuah, Vroom and Otchere (2011)

established that lack of awareness presented considerable influence on decisions to adopt ADR

in settling conflicts in construction projects in Ghana. In particular, they argued minimal


579 | P a g e

knowledge on adjudication significantly contributed to limited use of this ADR method in

resolving disputes in construction projects (Baffour-Awuah, et al., 2011). Further, lack of

awareness had presented a substantial adverse influence on use of ADR in settling disputes in

construction projects in South Africa (Bvumbwe and Thwala, 2011). Additionally, Bvumbwe

and Thwala (2011), assert minimal knowledge in conducting of arbitration, conciliation,

mediation and negotiation proceedings significantly contributed to the limited use of these ADR

methods in resolving construction disputes resulting to the increased use of litigation.

Preservation of Business Relationships and Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution in

Construction Projects

In his study, Overcash (2015) found evidence postulating desire to realize preservation of

business relationships presented a significant influence on the use of alternative dispute

resolution (ADR) in settling conflicts in construction projects in United States of America

(USA). Further, he observed arbitration played a pivotal role in reducing adversarial attitudes

among parties and ensuring fairness in settlement of construction disputes leading to its adoption

for resolving of majority of disputes in construction projects (Overcash, 2015). Similarly,

Tanielian (2012) established that the need for preservation of business relationships had a

substantial influence on decision to adopt ADR in determining disputes emerging during the

implementation of construction projects in Canada. In particular, he argued that arbitration was

considered the most appropriate ADR method for maintenance of business relations due to its

inherent advantageous features that facilitate flexibility of proceedings and elimination of hostile

enforceability of dispute settlements (Tanielian 2012).

Cunningham (2015) found evidence indicating preservation of business relationships had a

significant influence on the use of ADR in resolving disputes in construction projects in Ireland.

Specifically, they assert clients and contractors adhered to guidelines provided by the Royal

Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) on implementation of arbitration for binding decisions

after conciliation and mediation proceedings leading to the extensive use of these ADR methods

in construction disputes (Cunningham, 2015). She, (2011) established that preservation of

business relationship significantly influenced the embracing of alternative dispute resolution

(ADR) in resolving conflicts in construction projects in Australia. Specifically, they identified

Dispute Review Boards (DRB), mediation and negotiation as having been effective in reducing

adversarial attitudes between contractors and clients and facilitated flexibility of proceedings and

ensured fairness was upheld subsequently contributing to preservation of business relationships

(She, 2011). Similarly, Jelodar (2015) found evidence indicating preservation of business

relationships influenced use of ADR in settling disputes in construction projects in New Zealand.

Additionally, they argued inherent attributes of mediation, negotiation and arbitration that

enabled avoidance of diminution of respect among parties and the reducing of adversarial

attitudes between contractors and clients substantively contributed to the use of these ADR

methods in resolving of disputes in construction projects (Jelodar, 2015).


580 | P a g e

In his study, Amaradiwakara (2017) observed preservation of business relationships significantly

influenced the embracing of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in resolving disputes in

construction projects in Sri Lanka. In particular, he argued the inherent advantages of negotiation

that facilitated flexibility of proceedings and were pivotal in reducing adversarial attitudes

between contractors and clients contributed to the use of this ADR method in settling disputes

(Amaradiwakara, 2017).Similarly, Nihaaj (2018) found evidence that the need to maintain

business relationships presented a considerable influence on adoption of ADR in settling disputes

in construction projects in the same country. Specifically, he contends underlying valuable

attributes of arbitration that enabled avoidance of diminution of respect among parties and

elimination of hostile enforceability led to the use of this ADR method in solving disputes in

construction projects (Nihaaj, 2018). However, in their study Main and Hossian (2015) found

evidence that there was limited use of ADR methods in settling disputes in construction projects

for purposes of maintenance of business relationships in Bangladesh. Additionally, they contend

this was because existing ADR implementation mechanisms were weak and could therefore not

eliminate hostility in enforceability of decisions and ensure fairness in settlement of conflicts

(Main and Hossian, 2015).

In their study, Javadian and Husseini (2014) found evidence demonstrating preservation of

business relationship significantly influenced the adoption of alternative dispute resolution

(ADR) in resolving conflicts in construction projects in Iran. Specifically, they contend the

inherent characteristics of dissimilar ADR methods including; enabling flexibility of proceedings

and ensuring fairness, reduced adversarial attitudes between contractors and clients and

avoidance of diminution of respect among parties led to their use in conflict resolution in

construction projects (Javadian and Husseini, 2014). Further, Alfadhli (2013) observed the need

to preserve business relationship presented a substantive influence on the use of ADR in

resolving disputes in construction projects in Kuwait. In particular, they argued inherent

attributes of ADR methods such as the elimination of hostile enforceability, flexibility of

proceedings and avoidance of diminution of respect among parties resulted to their adoption in

settling construction disputes (Alfadhli, 2013). However, Besaiso, Fenn and Emsley (2016)

established that failure to appreciate the need for preservation of business relationship presented

a substantial adverse influence on use of ADR in settling disputes in construction projects in The

Palestine State. Additionally, they assert the ineffective application of mediation proceedings

that witnessed hostile enforceability of decisions, resulted to suspicions of unfairness in dispute

settlement and increased occurrences of diminution of respect among parties significantly

contributed a negative influence on its use in resolving construction disputes (Besaiso, et al.,

2016).

Okpaleke, Otegbulu and Emele, (2016) established the strong desire to realize preservation of

business relationships presented a substantial influence on use of alternative dispute resolution

(ADR) in resolving conflicts in construction projects in Nigeria. In particular, they contend the

inherent advantageous features of ADR methods that ensure fairness in settlement of disputes


581 | P a g e

and reduced adversarial attitudes between clients and contractors were pivotal in the adoption of

negotiation and mediation in settling disputes in construction projects (Okpaleke, et al., 2016).In

a study, Balogun, Ansary and Thwala (2017) found evidence demonstrating that the need for

preservation of business relationships presented considerable influence on use of ADR in

resolving conflicts in construction projects in South Africa. Specifically, they argued ADR

methods; mediation, negotiation and arbitration had facilitated flexibility of dispute proceedings

and eliminated hostile enforceability contributing to their use in solving conflicts in construction

projects (Balogun, et al., 2017). Similarly, Ntiyakunze (2011) observed the need for preservation

of business relationships significantly influenced the use of ADR in settling of disputes in

construction projects in Tanzania. In particular, they argued due to it numerous advantages such

as avoidance of hostile enforceability and ensuring of fairness, negotiation was adopted in

solving several disputes in the construction industry (Ntiyakunze, 2011).

Cost Minimization and Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution in Construction Projects

In their study, du Preez, Berry and Oosthuizen (2010) found evidence demonstrating that

objectives geared towards cost minimization lead to the use of alternative dispute resolution

(ADR) to solve conflicts in construction projects in the Netherlands. Specifically, they observed

the need to eliminate costs associated with litigation and those linked to project cost-overruns

informed decision to adopt ADR for resolving of construction projects disputes (du Preez, et al.,

2010). Similarly, Henry Fisher (2017) found the need to put in place measures that would ensure

costs are minimized in the event of disputes significantly contributed to the use of (ADR) in

solving conflicts in construction projects in both England and Wales. In particular, they argued

parties involved in construction contracts adopted ADR mainly driven by the desire to eliminate

costs associated with litigation, reduce occurrences of projects costs-overruns and project related

losses (Henry Fisher, 2017). However, Cavaleri (2018) found evidence that established most

parties involved in construction disputes opted out of ADR at a later stage due to high hidden

costs associated with it in Denmark. Specifically, she argued that arbitration presented extra

management costs that were considered high in comparison to the contract financial position

resulting to most disputes been litigated (Cavaleri, 2018).

In his study, Abeynayake (2017) observed parties in construction disputes were more inclined to

adopt alternative dispute resolution (ADR) to solve their conflicts emerging within the

construction projects in Sri Lanka. In particular, he argued the need to uphold contract financial

standing, eliminate litigation costs and avoid occurrences of project cost-overruns informed

decisions by majority clients and contractors to use ADR in resolving their issues (Abeynayake,

2017). Similarly, Hayati, Latief, Rarasati and Sasmita (2017) established predominant project

goal of cost minimization significantly influenced the use of ADR in resolving disputes

emerging in construction projects in Indonesia. Additionally, they contend the need to eliminate

high costs linked to litigation and to avoid project related losses led to the adoption of ADR

methods such as negotiation and mediation in solving of conflicts at construction sites (Hayati, et


582 | P a g e

al., 2017). In a study Zuhairah, Azlinor and Rozina (2010) also found evidence demonstrating

that project’s cost minimization objectives influenced the use of ADR in settling disputes in

construction projects in Malaysia. Specifically, they postulate the need to uphold contract

financial standing and avoid high costs associated with litigation led to the adoption of

arbitration, mediation and negotiation in resolving a substantive number of conflicts in

construction projects (Zuhairah, et al., 2010).

Saeb, Mohamed, Danuri and Zakaria (2018) established the need to reduce costs associated with

litigation significantly influenced the adoption of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) to solve

disputes in construction projects in the Iran. Additionally, they contend requirements to uphold

contract financial standing, the need to avoid occurrences of project cost-overruns and other

project related losses had informed decision to embrace ADR in resolving of construction

disputes (Saeb, et al., 2018). Further, in his study Salem (2015) found evidence indicating project

goals of costs minimization significantly influenced the use of ADR in resolution of disputes that

emerged in construction projects in the Kingdom of Bahrain. Specifically, he argued the need to

avoid high costs associated with litigation and occurrences of project cost-overruns lead to the

embracing of ADR in resolving majority of disputes in construction projects (Salem, 2015).

However, Taş and Fırtına (2015) in their study established that there was limited use of ADR in

resolving of disputes in construction projects in Turkey. Specifically, they observed despite the

cost minimization nature of Dispute Review Boards (DRB) majority of parties involved in

construction disputes opted for litigation in resolving their conflicts (Taş and Fırtına, 2015).

In their study, Ezeokoli, Ugochukwu, Kaetonna and Agu (2018) observed cost minimization

objectives predominantly influenced the adoption of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) to

solve disputes in construction projects in Nigeria. Specially, they note the desire to avoid high

costs linked to litigation and incidences of project cost-overruns significantly contributed to

embracing of mediation, negotiation and arbitration in settling of conflicts in construction

(Ezeokoli et al., 2018). Further, Mashwama, Aigbavboa and Thwala (2016) found evidence that

indicated projects’ goals whose main aim was to reduce costs influenced the use of ADR to solve

disputes in construction projects in the Swaziland. In particular, they observed the need to

address projects’ diminishing profit margins brought about by project cost-overruns and

requirements to uphold contract financial standing significantly contributed to the formation of

Dispute Review Boards (DRB), negotiations and mediations for resolution of construction

disputes (Mashwama, et al., 2016). Similarly, Rwelamila (2010) established project aims linked

to costs minimization significantly influenced the embracing of ADR in resolving of disputes in

construction projects in South Africa. Specifically, they identified the need to avoid high costs

associated with litigation, occurrences of project cost-overruns and related losses as to have

informed decision to adopt mediation in settling disputes in construction projects (Rwelamila

2010).

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Okechukwu_Ezeokoli?_sg=v7nGvawYpqI551WbtHeBmo76UKBk4CfohnJRriqwtIF3DBV5cLkoGxDK8I3xQY9dMYVYV6I.9WCeG4GEMkWYOYSbxJXbgtfBSHzu6R-rnfpsvmv5AZxTFCVqJ2pOJsjRvROuSo174LEsh4YXRKSdPtzM8I6IJQ

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stanley_Ugochukwu?_sg=v7nGvawYpqI551WbtHeBmo76UKBk4CfohnJRriqwtIF3DBV5cLkoGxDK8I3xQY9dMYVYV6I.9WCeG4GEMkWYOYSbxJXbgtfBSHzu6R-rnfpsvmv5AZxTFCVqJ2pOJsjRvROuSo174LEsh4YXRKSdPtzM8I6IJQ




583 | P a g e

Communication and Documentation Issues and Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution in

Construction Projects

In their study, Menassa and Peña Mora (2010) established that communication and

documentation issues influenced the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) to determine

disputes in construction projects in the United States of America (USA). In particular, they

argued that desire to uphold confidentiality and privacy of proceedings informed decisions to

adopt extensive use of Dispute Review Boards (DRBs) to settle construction disputes (Menassa

and Peña Mora, 2010). Aitken and Stitchkin (2018) also observed communication and

documentation issues presented a substantial influence on the use of ADR to solve disputes in

construction projects in Chile. Additionally, they contend the inherent features of litigation that

entails voluminous documents, the need for both confidentiality and privacy in proceedings

significantly contributed in the embracing of Dispute Review Boards (DRBs) and mediation as

the approaches of determining construction disputes (Aitken and Stitchkin, 2018). Similarly,

Gray, Bravo and Alarcón (2015) established communication and documentation issues had a

considerable influence on decisions to adopt ADR in resolving construction projects in Peru.

Specifically, they assert the need to uphold confidentiality in dispute areas, privacy in

proceedings and avoidance of voluminous documentation associated with litigation informed

decisions for the extensive embracing of ADR methods such as DRBs and negotiations in

construction disputes (Gray, et al., 2015).

Agapiou and Clark, (2011) found evidence postulating that communication and documentation

issues influenced the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) to determine disputes in

construction projects in Scotland. Specifically, they assert strong desire for confidentiality and

privacy of proceedings coupled with voluminous documentation linked with litigation presented

a substantial contribution to decisions to adopt mediation to resolve majority of construction

disputes (Agapiou and Clark, 2011). However, in their study Gregory-Stevens, Frame and

Henjewele (2016) established issues related to communication and documentation presented a

substantial adverse influence on use of ADR in resolving disputes in construction projects in

England. Additionally, they assert erroneous reporting of information coupled with the

unavailability of support documents contributed to the limited embracing of mediation as a

dispute resolution approach in construction projects (Gregory-Stevens, et al., 2016).

In his study, Ameer Ali (2010) found evidence demonstrating issues related to communication

and documentation had significantly influenced decisions to adopt alternative dispute resolution

(ADR) to determine disputes in construction projects in Malaysia. Additionally, he asserts that

the need to uphold privacy and confidentiality in proceedings coupled with desire to avoid

voluminous documentation associated with litigation contributed to an increase in the use of

mediation to resolve construction disputes (Ameer Ali, 2010). However, Cheung and Chow

(2011) observed communication and documentation issues presented a considerable adverse

influence to the use of ADR in resolving disputes in construction projects in Hong Kong.

Specifically, they assert Construction Project Dispute Negotiations (CPDN) failed predominantly


584 | P a g e

due to erroneous reporting of information and unobtainable support documents significantly

contributing to minimal use of this ADR method in determining construction disputes (Cheung

and Chow, 2011). Similarly, Sakate and Dhawale (2017) found evidence postulating issues

associated with communication and documentation had a substantial adverse influence on the use

of ADR in resolving disputes in construction in India. In particular, they assert erroneous

recording of information and the unavailability of support documents informed decisions to

litigate as opposed to embrace mediation, negotiation, conciliation and arbitration as dispute

determining approaches in construction projects (Sakate and Dhawale, 2017).

In their study, Dikbas and Ilter (2010) found evidence postulating that issues linked to

communication and documentation presented a significant negative influence on use of

alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in resolving disputes in construction projects in Turkey. In

particular, they observed erroneous reporting of information coupled with unobtainable support

documents adversely influenced decisions to adopt mediation as a dispute resolving approach in

construction projects (Dikbas and Ilter, 2010). Al-Humaidi (2014) also established that issues

linked to communication and documentation presented a substantial negative influence on use of

alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in resolving disputes in construction projects in Kuwait.

Additionally, they observed faulty recording of information, substandard communication in

presenting claims and unavailability of support documents adversely influenced the embracing of

arbitration in determining construction disputes (Al-Humaidi, 2014).Similarly, Besaiso, Fenn

and Emsley, (2018) observed dissimilar findings noting issues emerging from communication

and documentation had a considerable adverse influence on decisions to adopt ADR to solve

disputes in construction projects in the state of Palestine. Specifically, they assert erroneous

recording of information and substandard communication in presenting claims linked to some

ADR methods significantly contributed to the use of litigation as opposed to arbitration in

construction disputes (Besaiso, et al., 2018).

Isa and Emuze, (2016) established that communication and documentation issues influenced the

use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in resolving disputes in construction projects in

Nigeria. In particular, they argued that the strong desire for confidentiality and privacy of

proceedings coupled with voluminous documents linked to litigation informed decisions to

embrace negotiation and mediation in determining of construction disputes (Isa and Emuze,

2016). Similarly, Nyarko (2015) found evidence demonstrating that communication and

documentation issues substantially influenced decisions to adopt ADR in determining disputes in

construction projects in Ghana. Specifically, they assert the need to avoid voluminous documents

related to litigation and desire to realize privacy in proceedings significantly contributed to the

use of conciliation, mediation and negotiation ADR methods in solving construction disputes

(Nyarko, 2015). However, in their study Du Preez (2012), observed issues linked to

communication and documentation presented a considerable adverse influence on use of ADR in

determining disputes in construction projects in South Africa. Additionally, he contends

substandard communication in presentation of claims and erroneous recording of information


585 | P a g e

significantly contributed to the minimal employment of ADR methods in resolving of

construction disputes (Du Preez, 2012).

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB)

Developed by Ajzen and Fishbein, (1980) the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) is anchored on

the premise that individuals espouse distinct behaviors that are subject to the overriding control

of their inclinations or views towards those behaviors and the personal norms surrounding those

behaviors. Further, Ajzen (1991) assert the more intense an intention that a person has to perform

a particular behavior, the higher the probability the individual will become involved in the

behavior. Desire or aspiration according to this theory is anchored on three aspects; attitudes

with respect to the behavior, individualized or distinctive standards and deemed behavioral

control (Ajzen, 1985).

Marzouk and Moamen, (2009) proponents of the use of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB)

in studying disputes in construction projects, assert TPB is embraced to argue that selection and

application of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) approaches is well-thought-out and

intentional. Additionally, they argue TPB is appropriate for researching adoption of ADR in

resolving disputes in construction projects as it clearly elucidates; attitude, subjective norm and

deemed behavioral control in the decision making process of settling on which ADR method to

use (Marzouk and Moamen, 2009). Marzouk, El-Mesteckawi and El-Said, (2011) other

proponents argued decisions to embrace a particular ADR approach that arises from social

coercions or obligations such as; legal systems, local customs and culture are considered to be

under the subjective norm of TPB. They also observed the application of ADR approaches in

resolving construction disputes is also guided by their inherent merits that allow for cost

minimization and fairness these categorized under attitude (Marzouk, et al., 2011).

In adopting this theory to the current research, it is argued that decision on which ADR approach

to use by parties to a construction dispute are anchored by; their frame of mind, subjective norm

and deemed behavioral control which are guided by their knowledge of Alternative Dispute

Resolution (ADR), past experience on flexibility of proceedings, fairness, level of hostility

involved during enforceability of decisions and the inherent capability of ADR to preserve

relationships. Additionally, the theory is used to argue that parties to a construction project

dispute settle on ADR depending on their financial status this predominantly defining their desire

to engage to litigation and costs associated with it. Research questions one, two and three that is;

lack of awareness, preservation of business relationships and cost minimization were adequately

answered by this theory.


586 | P a g e

Transaction Cost Economics Theory (TCE)

Formulated by Williamson (1975), the Transactions Cost Economics Theory (TCE) is based on

the premise that the preferred among optional institutional arrangements (governance structures)

is arrived at by contrasting of the costs of transacting found within a distinct structure. Further,

Williamson (1996) asserts transactors prefer management frameworks as a way of reducing the

costs of making their transactions. Under the TCE costs are categorized as; production costs

which encompass land, labour, capital and materials and the transaction costs which he linked

with contriving as well as administering the business relationship (Williamson, 1996).

Additionally, Conlin, Langford and Kennedy (1996) proponents of the Transaction Cost Theory

argued in construction projects disputes, Transaction costs refer to the costs that are linked to

litigation, those that are associated in establishing partnerships and Dispute Review Boards

(DRBs). In particular, they embody; financial, legal, and technical advisory costs incurred by

contractors, consultants and or clients involved in construction contract dispute (Doree, 1994;

Yates, 1998). In adopting this theory to the current research, it is argued that in order to minimize

costs associated with litigation clients, contractors and consultants in the construction discipline

should be ready to adopt alternative dispute resolution (ADR) approaches that provide for this.

The ADR approaches embraced must assist in; elimination of litigation costs, avoidance of

project costs-overruns and lead to the realization of reduced construction projects’ related losses

Research questions three is adequately answered by this theory.

Stair-Step Model of Dispute Resolution

Formulated by O’reilly and Mawdesley, (1994) the Stair-Step Model of Dispute Resolution is

anchored on the premise that different types of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods

present dissimilar levels of animosity and cost.

Figure 1: Stair-Step Model of Dispute Resolution

Increase Hostility and Cost

Arbitration

Adjudication/Administrative

Decisions

Mediation

Negotiation


587 | P a g e

Cheung (1999) a proponent of the Stair-Step Model of Dispute Resolution argued that as parties

to a construction dispute chose an ADR method and rise from negotiation towards arbitration so

does hostility towards each other increase and the costs involved in resolving the dispute. This

adversely affects relationship among contractors, consultants and their clients (Cheung 1999).

Uff (2005) another proponent of the model observed communication and documentation issues

also arise as parties to a dispute move from negotiation towards arbitration. The model was used

to support study variables preservation of business relationships, costs minimization and

communication and documentation issues.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Design

A research design is defined as the blueprint chosen by a researcher providing guide lines to the

collection, measurement and analysis of data with the overall objective of effectively addressing

the research problem (Leedy & Ormrod, 2010). It is composed of the outline or layout for the

gathering, evaluation, as well as analysis of data. To achieve study objectives, this research

adopted a descriptive survey research design. Survey design guided the process of undertaking

an investigation on critical factors influencing use of alternative dispute resolution in

construction projects disputes in Imenti North Sub County, Meru County. Descriptive survey

design was the optimal design for this study in that it facilitated the gathering of both qualitative

and quantitative data establishing the link between study variables and study problem

(Christensen, Johnson & Turner, 2011). Descriptive survey research design was also espoused

because it facilitated the process of information gathering on the current state of affairs and

thoroughly depicting traits of the study population (Salaria, 2012).

Target Population

Population is defined as the entire categorization of persons or items to which a researcher has

interest in generalizing findings (Kothari, 2012). The target population of this study was 255

consultants and contractors working in the target construction projects and the clients of these

projects. The choice of these respondents was informed by the expectation that they are familiar

with the variables under study and therefore provided the necessary data required.

Sample Size and Sampling Procedure

Sampling refers to the techniques used to select a subset of individuals or objects from the larger

study population with the goal of depicting the particular population (Emmel, 2013). The sample

size for the investigation was 155 drawn from a targeted population of 255 respondents. The

figure was obtained by applying the Yamane (1967) formula;


588 | P a g e

This was calculated as illustrated in 3.4.2 on sampling procedure. The accessible population for

this study was 255 respondents. For proportionate selection of respondents, Yamane (1967)

recommend the formula:

According to the formula: n= the calculated sample size; N= the size of the target population; e=

the error of 5 percentage points

Using the formula the sample size was:

Contractors =

Consultants (Architecture, Quantity Surveyor and Structural Engineers) =

= 14

Clients =

The sampling approaches that were employed in this research were; Stratified and Simple

Random sampling techniques. This was because the target population was grouped into three

dissimilar categories; stratified sampling ensured accurate and or adequate representation of the

dissimilar study’s respondents to enhance representation of variables linked to them. Simple

random sampling was then employed to single out the sampled subjects proportionately from

different strata (Lohr, 2010).

Research Instruments

Questionnaires were used to collect primary data. Krosnick and Presser (2010) define a

questionnaire as a structured research tool that is used for research purposes to collect data from

respondents on issues affecting them or others. The choice of this research instrument was

informed by its inherent advantages including; inexpensive, non-laborious to administer to a

large sample and respondents have sufficient time to provide meticulously thought out responses.

(Krosnick & Presser, 2010). This research study’s questionnaire embodied closed as well as open

ended questions. Closed questions integrated a fixed set of questions on which sampled subjects

was required to provide their responses in a particularized sequence and with pre-defined

response alternatives. Open ended questions do not confine or limit the respondents to certain

perspectives but grant them with the possibilities to reveal data in a realistic manner.

Questionnaire is sub-divided in 6 segments. The first segment requested the sampled subjects to

fill in his or her bio data, while the remaining 5 segments were composed of variables on which

the study investigated. Portions of the questionnaire were; Lack of Awareness, Preservation of


589 | P a g e

Business Relationships, Cost Minimization and Communication and Documentation Issues and

Alternative Dispute Resolution in Construction Projects.

Data Collection Procedures

Primary data was collected by applying the utilization of questionnaires and these were

distributed both in person and with the help of research assistants. The interactive approach to

the sampled subjects was employed. Structured questionnaires were utilized guided by the fact

they are easy to administer as individual items are accompanied by optional answers and are

additionally economical with respect to time and financial resources. As a measure of securing

an appropriate or agreeable response rate, a register of distributed questionnaires were developed

as this aided in trailing of this data gathering instrument.

Data Analysis Techniques

Data analysis is elucidated as the procedure that involves the packaging of collected data,

formulating and classifying its main elements to such an extent that it is comfortably and

effectively conveyed (Steven, Brady and Patricia, 2010).Primary data was categorized, compiled,

coded and analyzed to enhance the elimination of data errors and the inconsistence of elements.

To ensure that primary data was analyzed in a reliable way; SPSS version 22.0 was used (Pallant,

2011). Analyzed data presentation used descriptive statistic consisting of; frequencies, mean,

standard deviation and variance. Results of the analysis made it easy to make valid conclusions,

deductions and inferences on the problem been researched by the study. Data from open ended

questions was analyzed by applying the content analysis approach. This entailed open coding,

creating categories and abstraction. Results using this technique were presented in themes guided

by the research’s objectives individually. Frequencies and percentages were applied to

encapsulate information. With the view of determining the unique influence and significance of

distinctive research study’s four variables with respect to alternative dispute resolution in

construction projects and obtain inferential statistics, a multivariate regression model was

employed. This is an adjustable technique of data analysis that was applicable in the occasion

that one sought to examine the association between the dependent variable any other factors. The

correlation was linear which was translated that the magnitude to which the variations in the

dependent variable was connected to the variations in the independent variables (Brian &

Graham, 2010). The analysis aided in arriving at valid inference on the topic being researched

on. The regression model was presented as:

Y = β0 + β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3 + β4X4 + ε

Where: Y = Alternative Dispute Resolution in Construction Projects; β0 = Constant Term; β1,

β2, β3 and β4 = Beta coefficients; X1= Lack of Awareness; X2= Preservation of


590 | P a g e

Business Relationships; X3= Cost Minimization; X4= Communication and

Documentation Issues’; ε = Error term

RESEARCH RESULTS

The study sought to establish the influence of lack of awareness on use of alternative dispute

resolution in construction projects in Imenti North Sub County. The study found that

insufficiency of understanding of arbitration does not influence alternative dispute resolution in

construction projects disputes. The study also found that scarcity of knowledge on mediation

does influence use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects disputes. Further, the

study found that minimal knowledge on conciliation influences use of alternative dispute

resolution in construction projects disputes. Also, it was found that inadequacy of understanding

of negotiation influences use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects disputes.

The study also aimed at examining the influence of preservation of business relationships on use

of Alternative Dispute Resolution in Construction Projects in Imenti North Sub County. The

study found that reduced adversarial attitudes and hostility between client, contractor, quantity

surveyor and architecture influence use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects

disputes. Also, the study established that flexibility of proceedings and fairness influences use of

alternative dispute resolution in construction projects disputes. The study found that avoidance of

diminution of respect among parties influence use of alternative dispute resolution in

construction projects disputes and that elimination of hostile enforcement influences use of

alternative dispute resolution in construction projects disputes.

The study sought to determine the influence of cost minimization on use of Alternative Dispute

Resolution in Construction Projects in Imenti North Sub County. The study found that extra

management costs do not influence use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects

disputes. The study found that elimination of litigation costs influences use of alternative dispute

resolution in construction projects disputes and that reduction of project related losses influences

use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects disputes. The study found that

project costs over-runs influence use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects

disputes and that contract financial standing influences use of alternative dispute resolution in

construction projects disputes.

The study sought to establish the influence of communication and documentation issues on use

of Alternative Dispute Resolution in Construction Projects. The study found that privacy of the

proceedings influences use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects disputes.

Also, the study found that erroneous reporting of information influences use of alternative

dispute resolution in construction projects disputes and that voluminous litigation documents

influences use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects disputes. Further, the

study found that unobtainable support documents do not influence use of alternative dispute


591 | P a g e

resolution in construction projects disputes and that confidentiality of dispute issues/areas and

proceedings influences use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects disputes.

The research sought to establish the extent of reliability that measures of use of alternative

dispute resolution had in construction projects disputes in Imenti North Sub-County. The study

found that the number of disputes resolved using mediation and the duration of the proceedings

were reliable measures of use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects disputes in

Imenti North Sub-County to a very great extent. Also, the study found that irrevocability of the

settlement, increase in the number of negotiated disputes in construction and disputes resolved

using arbitration were reliable measures of use of alternative dispute resolution in construction

projects disputes in Imenti North Sub-County to a great extent.

INFERENTIAL STATISTICS

The researcher conducted both Pearson moment correlation analysis and the multiple regression

analysis. Pearson moment correlation was conducted to establish the strength of the level of

association while multiple regression was done to establish the relationship between variables.

Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation

A correlation is a number between -1 and +1 that measures the degree of association between

two variables. A positive value for the correlation implies a positive association while a negative

value for the correlation implies a negative or inverse association. The findings were as shown in

Table 1.

Table 1: Correlation Coefficients Matrix

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Dis

pu

te

Res

olu

tion

in

Con

stru

ctio

n

Lack

of

Aw

are

nes

s

Pres

ervati

on

of

Bu

sin

ess

Rel

ati

on

ship

s

Cost

s M

inim

izati

on

Com

mu

nic

ati

on

an

d D

ocu

men

tati

on

Issu

es

Alternative Dispute

Resolution in Construction

Pearson Correlation 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .

Lack of Awareness Pearson Correlation .786 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .047 .

Preservation of Business

Relationships

Pearson Correlation .865 .637 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .009 .008 .

Costs Minimization Pearson Correlation .836 .451 .523 1.

Sig. (2-tailed) .012 .019 .016

Communication and

Documentation Issues

Pearson Correlation .825 .518 .597 .531 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .039 .005 .028 .014 .


592 | P a g e

The analysis of correlation results between the use of alternative dispute resolution in

construction projects in Imenti North and lack of awareness shows a positive coefficient 0.786,

with p-value of 0.047. It indicates that the result is significant at α =5% and that if the lack of

awareness increases it will have a positive impact on the use of alternative dispute resolution in

construction projects in Imenti North. The correlation results between preservation of business

relationships and the use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects in Imenti North

also indicates the same type of result where the correlation coefficient is 0.865 and a p-value of

0.009 which significant at α = 5%.

The results also show that there is a positive association between costs minimization and the use

of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects in Imenti North where the correlation

coefficient is 0.836, with a p-value of 0.012. The results also show that there is a positive

relationship between communication and documentation issues and the use of alternative dispute

resolution in construction projects in Imenti North where the correlation coefficient is 0.825,

with a p-value of 0.039. Nevertheless, the positive relationship indicates that when the practice

of the afore-mentioned factors is in place the use of alternative dispute resolution in construction

projects in Imenti North increases.

Multiple Regression Analysis

The multiple regression analysis was used to test the relationship between the variables where it

shows how the dependent variable is influenced by the independent variables. The results were

as shown in Table 2, 3 and 4.

Table 2: Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate

1 0.893 0.797 0.791 0.808

From the results, the adjusted R square was 0.791. This implies model highly fits the data since

the Adjusted R square was more than 0.7 and that lack of awareness, preservation of business

relationships, costs minimization and communication and documentation issues explain 79.1% of

the variation in use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects in Imenti North. The

remaining 20.9% accounted for the factors influencing use of alternative dispute resolution in

construction projects in Imenti North that are not covered in this study.

Table 3: ANOVA Test

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1

Regression 323.133 4 80.783 120.857 .000

Residual 82.216 123 0.668

Total 405.349 127

From the ANOVA Table, the p-value was 0.000 and the calculated F-value was 120.857. This

shows that the overall regression model was significant in predicting the outcome of use of


593 | P a g e

alternative dispute resolution in construction projects in Imenti North based on the values of lack

of awareness, preservation of business relationships, costs minimization and communication and

documentation issues since p-value was less than 0.05 and F-calculated was greater than F-

critical (2.445).

Table 4: Coefficients of Determination

Model Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 1.136 0.182 6.242 .000

Lack of Awareness 0.612 0.208 0.739 2.942 .004

Preservation of Business

Relationships

0.736 0.296 0.784 2.486 .015

Costs Minimization 0.701 0.311 0.680 2.254 .030

Communication and

Documentation Issues

0.675 0.239 0.718 2.824 .007

The established model for the study was:

Y= 1.136 + 0.612X1 + 0.736X2 + 0.701X3 + 0.675X4

Where: Y= Use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects in Imenti North;

β0=constant; X1= Lack of Awareness; X2= Preservation of Business Relationships; X3=

Costs Minimization; X4= Communication and Documentation Issues

The regression equation above has established that taking (lack of awareness, preservation of

business relationships, costs minimization and communication and documentation issues), use of

alternative dispute resolution in construction projects in Imenti North will be 1.136. The findings

presented also show that taking all other independent variables at zero, a unit increase in the lack

of awareness significantly leads to an increase in the score of use of alternative dispute resolution

in construction projects in Imenti North as shown by B=0.612 and p-value of 0.004.

Further, the study revealed that a unit change in preservation of business relationships would

significantly lead to 0.736 increase in the score of use of alternative dispute resolution in

construction projects in Imenti North since p-value (0.015) was less than 0.05. Moreover, if all

other factors are held constant at zero, a unit increase costs minimization significantly leads to

increase in use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects in Imenti North as shown

by a regression coefficient of 0.701 and p-value of 0.030. The study also revealed that a unit

change in communication and documentation issues would significantly lead to 0.675 increase in

the score of use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects in Imenti North since p-

value (0.007) was less than 0.05.

Overall, preservation of business relationships had the greatest influence on use of alternative

dispute resolution in construction projects in Imenti North, followed by costs minimization,


594 | P a g e

followed by communication and documentation issues while lack of awareness had the least

influence on the use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects in Imenti North.

CONCLUSIONS

The study concluded that lack of awareness has a positive and significant influence on use of

alternative dispute resolution in construction projects in Imenti North Sub County. The study

concluded that minimal knowledge in conducting of arbitration, conciliation, mediation and

negotiation proceedings significantly contributes to the limited use of ADR methods in resolving

construction disputes resulting to the increased use of litigation.

The study concluded that preservation of business relationships has a strong and positive

significance on the use of alternative dispute resolution in construction projects in Imenti North

Sub County. The study deduced that inherent characteristics of dissimilar ADR methods

including; enabling flexibility of proceedings and ensuring fairness, reduced adversarial attitudes

between contractors and clients and avoidance of diminution of respect among parties lead to use

in conflict resolution in construction projects.

The study concluded that cost minimization has a positive significance on the use of alternative

dispute resolution in construction projects in Imenti North Sub County. The study concluded that

there is need to avoid high costs associated with litigation, occurrences of project cost-overruns

and related losses as to have informed decision to adopt mediation in settling disputes in

construction projects.

The study concluded that communication and documentation issues influence use of Alternative

Dispute Resolution in Construction Projects significantly. The study concluded that erroneous

recording of information and the unavailability of support documents informs decisions to

litigate as opposed to embrace mediation, negotiation, conciliation and arbitration as dispute

determining approaches in construction projects.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The study recommends that there is need for high profile public promotional campaigns. The

campaigns would need to be continuous since most users of ADR services tend to believe that

they are one-off users who may never again have a significant land dispute. A promotional

campaign specifically targeted at those people who are regular users of the justice system

including National and County government agencies and the public. There is also need for the

development of information materials about ADR, including the various sorts of ADR, and about

the sorts of services they provide. There is also need for development of pamphlets, videos, or

booklets setting out people’s basic legal entitlements in relevant areas.

The study also recommends that supplies should be exhaustively elaborated and detailed in the

contract conditions, designs and specifications i.e. nullify, if possible, opportunities for differing


595 | P a g e

interpretations of the requirements of the documents. There is also a need that site investigations

and designs should be adequately complete prior to processing construction contracts,

The study recommends that the clients, contractors and consultants should ensure that they have

adequate and correct appreciation of their respective professional and ethical obligations. Both

contractors and consultants should attend seriously to their tasks and assignments as outlined in

the contract document. The study also recommends that documentation of project’s progress

work force, weather, equipment, correspondence all events on timely bases should be kept

meticulously by the contractor and copy to the consultant timely.

The study recommends that there should be an improvement on the long processes of payment

approval and effecting by consultants and clients respectively. The study also recommends that

the contacts should be clear in the costs as parties involved in construction tend to opt out of

ADR due to high hidden costs this is because arbitration presents extra management costs that

were considered high in comparison to the contract financial position resulting to most disputes

been litigated.

The study recommends that partnering works well to prevent disputes. Accordingly, best

adjudication or arbitration approach for construction projects would be started with partnering

and relying on direct negotiation. Clients have to consider contractors as their fellow business

collaborates, where they have called them to fill the gap they want them in their project set-ups.

There shall be mutual understanding in their contract agreement. No one is subordinate to the

other, those who made contractual agreement possess equal legal right. This requires the clients

to be reasonable in discharging their contractual obligation diligently.

REFERENCES

Abeynayake, M.D.T.E. (2017). Alternative Dispute Resolution Methods Used in the

Construction Industry in Sri Lanka. Unpublished Thesis Master of Philosophy

Degree, Department of Building Economics, University of Moratuwa Sri Lanka.

Agapiou, A., and Clark, B. (2011). Scottish construction lawyers and mediation: an investigation

into attitudes and experiences. International Journal of Law in the Built

Environment, Volume 3(2), 159-181.

Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J.

Beckman (Eds.), Action-control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11- 39).

Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behaviour and Human

Decision Processes, Volume 50(2), pp.179-291.

Ajzen, I., and Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Aitken and Stitchkin (2018) Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Construction: Chile. IBA-

International Construction Projects Committee Report.

Alfadhli, A. (2013). Does the alternative dispute resolution have a role to play in the

construction industry in the State of Kuwait (Look into the most appropriate


596 | P a g e

methodology that may be taken in Kuwait in comparison with what are available

in the English legal system. Doctoral dissertation, University of Southampton.

Al-Humaidi, H. (2014). Arbitration in Kuwait: Study of Current Practices and Suggestions for

Improvements. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering

and Construction, Volume 6(1), pp 269-275.

Almutairi, S. (2015). Causes of litigation in the Saudi Arabian construction industry.

Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University.

Alshahrani, S. (2017). Dispute resolution methods in the construction industry sector in the

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Unpublished Master Thesis, School of the Built

Environment, University of Salford.

Amaradiwakara, S.P.W. (2017). Effectiveness of Negotiation as a Method of Alternative Dispute

Resolution in Sri Lankan Construction Industry. Unpublished Thesis in Master of

Science in Construction Law and Dispute Resolution, University of Moratuwa,

Sri Lanka.

Ameer Ali, N.A.N. (2010). Mediation in the Malaysian construction industry. In P. Brooker & S.

Wilkinson (Eds.), Mediation in the Construction Industry: An International

Review (pp. 82-107). USA and Canada: Spon Press.

Baffour-Awuah, E., Vroom, C.B., and Otchere, P.K (2011) An investigation on why adjudication

is not a popular dispute resolution method in the Ghanaian construction industry

In: Laryea, S., Leiringer, R. and Hughes, W. (Eds) Procs West Africa Built

Environment Research (WABER) Conference, 19-21 July 2011, Accra, Ghana,

143-151.

Balogun, O.A., Ansary, N. and Thwala, W.D. (2017) Adjudication and arbitration as a

technique in resolving construction industry disputes: A literature review.

Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Advances in Civil,

Structural and Environmental Engineering, Florence, Italy.

Barough, A.S., Shoubi, M.V., and Preece, C.N. (2013) Evaluating the Effectiveness of Mediation

and Arbitration Processes in Resolving Disputes in The Malaysian Construction

Industry. International Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 2(1), pp.21-28.

Besaiso, H., Fenn, P., and Emsley, M. (2016). Alternative dispute resolution in Palestine: the

myth and dilemma of construction mediation. International Journal of Law in the

Built Environment, Volume 8(3), pp.269-286.

Besaiso, H., Fenn, P., and Emsley, M. (2018). Evolution of construction arbitration. Journal of

Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction, Volume

10(2), pp.15-27.

Blake, S., Browne, J., and Sime, S. (2014). A Practical Approach to Alternative Dispute

Resolution (3 edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Brian, S.E, and Graham,D. (2010). Applied Multivariate Data Analysis, Second

Edition.Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd,

Bvumbwe, C., and Thwala, W.D. (2011). An exploratory study of dispute resolution methods in

the South African construction industry. International Conference on Information

and Finance. Singapore: IACSIT Press.

Callum M., (2103) Arbitrate, adjudicate or mediate? [online]. Retrieved: 15.3.2019. Available:

https://www.constructionnews.co.uk/companies/supply-chain/arbitrate-

adjudicate-or-mediate/8654935.article


597 | P a g e

Cavaleri, S.C. (2018) "Danish Construction Arbitration: Civil Proceedings in Disguise?"

Proceedings of the International Arbitration Symposium, 7-10 June 2018,

Salzburg, Austria.

Chan, P. (2014). A book review of “Best Practice in Construction Disputes–Avoidance,

Management and Resolution”. Construction Economics and Building, Volume

14(3), pp.99-101.

Cheung, S.O., (1999). Critical Factors affecting the use of alternative dispute resolution

processes in construction. International Journal of Project Management, Volume

17, pp.189-194.

Cheung, S., and Chow, P. (2011). Withdrawal in Construction Project Dispute Negotiation.

Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Volume 137(12),

pp.1071-1079.

Conlin, J.T., Langford, A.D. and Kennedy, P. (1996) The Relationship between Construction

Procurement Strategies and Construction Contract Disputes. In Taylor, R.G. (ed.)

Proceedings of CIB W92 Symposium : North Meets South : Developing Ideas,

University of Natal, South Africa.

Christensen, L. B., Johnson, R.B., and Turner, L. (2011). Research methods, design, and analysis

(11thed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon:

Cunningham, T. (2015). Dispute Resolution under the Principal Irish Forms of Building

Contract. School of Surveying and Construction Management, Dublin Institute of

Technology.

Delport, C.S.L and Roesternburg,W.J.H. (2011). Quantitative data collection methods. (S. H. In

De Vos A.S., Ed.) Pretoria:JL Van Schaik Publishers.

De Vos A.S., Strydom, H., Fouché, G.B., and Delport, C.S.L. (2011). Research at the grass roots

for the social sciences and human service professions. 4th ed. Pretoria: JL Van

Schaik Publishers.

Dikbas, A., and Ilter, D. (2010). Construction mediation in Turkey. In Mediation in the

Construction Industry (pp. 147-167). Routledge.

Doree, A.G. (1994) Conflict as Element of Construction Trade. In Fenn and Gameson (Eds)

(1992) Construction Conflict: Management and Resolution, E & F N Spon:

London.

Du Preez, O., Berry, F., and Oosthuizen, P. (2010). Mediation and conciliation as methods of

Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) in the construction industry. In Proceedings

5th Built Environment Conference p. 11-20, July 2010, Durban, South Africa.

Du Preez, O. (2012). Competence levels of alternate dispute resolution facilitators in the

construction industry in South Africa. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation,

University of the Free State.

Elziny, A.A., Mohamadien, M. A., Ibrahim, H. M., and Fattah, M. A. (2016). An expert system

to manage dispute resolutions in construction projects in Egypt. Ain Shams

Engineering Journal, Volume 7(1), pp.57-71.

Emmel, N. (2013). Sampling and choosing cases in qualitative research: A realist approach.

London: SAGE.

Ezeokoli, O., Ugochukwu, S., Kaetonna, A.I., and Agu, N.N. (2018). Appraising the Potentials

of Alternative Dispute Resolution as a Strategy for resolving Conflicts on

Construction Projects in Onitsha Metropolis, Anambra State, Nigeria. Project

Management World Journal, Volume 2(2), pp. 1-14.


https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stanley_Ugochukwu?_sg=v7nGvawYpqI551WbtHeBmo76UKBk4CfohnJRriqwtIF3DBV5cLkoGxDK8I3xQY9dMYVYV6I.9WCeG4GEMkWYOYSbxJXbgtfBSHzu6R-rnfpsvmv5AZxTFCVqJ2pOJsjRvROuSo174LEsh4YXRKSdPtzM8I6IJQ


598 | P a g e

Farooqui, R. U., Umer, M. and Lodi, S.H. (2012). Dispute Resolution in the Pakistani

Construction Industry–An Assessment of Current Methods. Proceedings of the

Third International Conference on Construction in Developing Countries,

“Advancing Civil, Architectural and Construction Engineering & Management”.

July 4-6,2012, Bangkok, Thailand.

Fisher, C.M. (2010). Researching and Writing a Dissertation: An Essential Guide For Business

Students. 3rd ed.Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall

Ghauri, P.N and Grønhaug, K., (2010). Research Methods in Business Studies (4th Edition),.

London: FT Pearson.

Getahun, A., Macarubbo, Y.C., and Mosisa, A. (2016). Assessment of Construction Dispute

Resolution in Ethiopian Somali Regional State Road Projects: A Case Study on

Road Projects in the Region. American Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume

4(6), pp. 282-289.

Gillies, N. (2015). Avoiding and Resolving Construction Disputes. MBIE, Construction Sector

Report, November 2015, Auckland, New Zealand.

Gill, A., Gray, J., Skitmore, M., and Callaghan, S. (2015). Comparison of the effects of litigation

and ADR in South-East Queensland. International Journal of Construction

Management, Volume 15(3), pp.254-263.

Gray, J., Bravo, J and Alarcón, G. (2015) Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Construction:

Peru. IBA-International Construction Projects Committee Report

Gregory-Stevens, J., Frame, I., and Henjewele, C. (2016). Mediation in construction disputes in

England. International Journal of Law in the Built Environment, Volume 8(2),

pp.123-136.

Gunasena, K.B.D. (2010). Performance of Critical Attributes in Alternative Dispute Resolution

(ADR): A Study in Sri Lankan Construction Industry. Sri Lankan Quantity

Surveyors Journal, Volume 4(10), pp 42-48.

Harrison, N.R. (2011). Applying Adjudication as an Alternate Dispute Resolution for

Construction Disputes in the United States. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation in

Construction Science, Texas A & M University.

Hayati, K., Latief, Y., Rarasati, A.D., and Sasmita, W.S. (2017) Process of Dispute Resolution in

Construction Projects through Arbitration. Journal of Applied Environmental and

Biological Sciences, Volume 7(4), pp 43-48.

Henry Fisher, W. (2017). The use of arbitration in the construction industry in England and

Wales: an evaluation of its continuing role following the Arbitration Act 1996.

Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Wolverhampton.

Hussin, S.N. and Ismail, Z. (2015). Factors To Further Enhance The Use Of Mediation In

Malaysian Construction Industry. Journal of Technology Management and

Business, Volume 2(1), pp.1-19.

Idowu, F. O., Ogunbiyi, O., and Hungbo, A. A. (2015). An evaluation of the use of ADR in the

Nigerian public construction project disputes. International Journal of

Sustainable Construction Engineering and Technology, Volume 6(1), pp.16-28.

Isa, R., and Emuze, F. (2016) Stakeholders’ Perceptions of Construction Dispute Resolution

Mechanism in Nigerian Construction. Proceedings of Engineering, Project and

Production Management (EPPM) Conference, September 2016 Bialystok, Poland.


599 | P a g e

Javadian, A and Husseini, M. (2014). Owner and contractor relationship management in

construction projects and how to resolve their disputes. The 2nd International

Urban Management Congress. Tehran.

Jelodar, M.B. (2015) Understanding Relationship Quality in Construction Projects: A study of

the New Zealand Construction Industry. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis in Civil

Engineering, Field of Construction Engineering and Management, The University

of Auckland New Zealand.

Keršuliene, V., Zavadskas, E. K., and Turskis, Z. (2010). Selection of rational dispute resolution

method by applying new step‐ wise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA).

Journal of business economics and management, Volume 11(2), pp.243-258.

Khekale, C. and Futane, N. (2015). Management of Claims and Disputes in Construction

Industry. International Journal of Science and Research, Volume 4(5), pp.848-

855.

Kodwo, A. A. (2017). The Role Of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) In The Settlement Of

Construction Disputes In Ghana–The Contractors’ Perspective. International

Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Technology, Volume 5 (5),

pp.393-412.

Kothari, C.R. (2012). Research Methodology: An introduction. In Research Methodology:

Methods and Techniques.New Delhi: New Age International.

Krosnick, J. A., and Presser, S. (2010). Question and questionnaire design.Handbook of survey

research, 2(3).Bingley, West Yorkshire, England : Emerald Group Publishing

Limited.

Kurniawan, F., (2015) Construction Dispute Resolution in Indonesia. Proceedings of Narotama

International Conference on Civil Engineering, November 2015, Narotama

University, Indonesia.

Lee, C.K (2017). Decision Making in Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Use in Construction

Projects: A Planned Behaviour Approach. Unpublished PHD Thesis, University

of Auckland.

Leedy, P.D. and Ormrod, J.E. (2010). Practical Research: Planning and Design, Ninth Edition,.

New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

Lohr, S.L. (2010). Sampling: Design and Analysis, 2nd

ed. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Maiketso, N.C., and Maritz, M.J. (2012). Adjudication as an alternative dispute resolution

method in the South African construction industry. Journal Of The South African

Institution Of Civil Engineering, Volume 54(2), pp.65-70.

Main, N., and Hossian, S.R. (2015). Problems of Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms

and Proposals for Improvement: A Study in Bangladesh. International Journal in

Management and Social Science, Volume 1(1), pp. 22-32.

Magg, M., and Schmitt, K. (2010). Arbitration as a Dispute Resolution Method in the Swedish

and German Construction Industry-An analysis of current methodologies.

Unpublished Master Thesis in Design and Construction Project Management,

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Division of Construction

Management, Chalmers University of Technology.

Marzouk, M.M., El-Mesteckawi, L., and El-Said, M. (2011). Dispute resolution aided tool for

construction projects in Egypt. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management,

Volume 17(1), pp.63-71.


600 | P a g e

Marzouk, M., and Moamen, M. (2009). A framework for estimating negotiation amounts in

construction projects. Construction Innovation: Information, Process,

Management, Volume 9(2), pp.133-148.

Mashwama, N.X., Aigbovboa, C.O., and Thwala, W.D. (2015). Evaluating the impact of

construction dispute and the use of ADR in the Swaziland construction industry.

Unpublished Master Thesis, Department of Construction Management & Quantity

Surveying, Faculty of Engineering & the Built Environment, University of

Johannesburg, South Africa.

Mashwama, X.N., Aigbavboa, C.O., and Thwala, W.D. (2016). Construction Stakeholders’

Perception on Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Construction Industry of

Swaziland. Proceeding of the International Conference of Socio-economic

Researchers, April 2016 (pp.194-204), Belgrade, Serbia.

Menassa, C., and Peña Mora, F. (2010). Analysis of Dispute Review Boards Application in U.S.

Construction Projects from 1975 to 2007. Journal of Management in Engineering,

Volume 26(2), pp. 65-77.

Mulolo, F., Alinaitwe, H., and Mwakali, J.A (2015). Choice of Alternative Dispute Resolution

Process in Uganda’s Construction Industry. International Journal of Technology

Diffusion, Volume 2(1), pp.28-39.

Musonda, H.M., and Muya, M. (2011). Construction Dispute Management and Resolution in

Zambia. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and

Construction, Volume 3(4), pp.160-169.

Nabatova, V. (2017). Alternative dispute resolution in the construction industry. Unpublished

Bachelor Thesis, Faculty of Civil Engineering Department of Economics and

Management in Civil Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague.

Neuman, W.L. (2011). Social research methods:Quantitative and qualitative methods (7th ed.).

Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Nihaaj, N.M.M. (2018). Critical analysis of arbitration method used in the construction industry

in Sri Lanka. Unpublished Thesis in Master of Science in Construction Project

Management, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratuwa, Sri

Lanka.

Ntiyakunze, S.K. (2011). Conflicts in Building Projets in Tanzania: Analysis of Causes and

Management Approaches. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Department of Real

Estate and Construction Management, KTH Royal Institute of Technology.

Nyarko, M. (2015). Conflicts in Construction Projects in Ghana: Analysis of Causes and

Management Approaches. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Department of

Building Technology, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology.

Okpaleke, F. C., Otegbulu, A.C., and Emele, C.R. (2016). Mitigating Risk Impact of Disputes on

Real Estate Business and Investment in Lagos: The Alternative Dispute

Resolution (ADR) Approach. Covenant Journal of Business and Social Sciences,

Volume 6(1), pp 1-23.

Onukwube, H. (2011) Management of building construction disputes in Nigeria In: Laryea, S.,

Leiringer, R. and Hughes, W. (Eds) Procs West Africa Built Environment

Research (WABER) Conference, 19-21 July 2011, Accra, Ghana, 725-734.

O’reilly, M.P., and Mawdesley, M.J., (1994). The evaluation of construction disputes: a risk

approach. Blackwell Publishing: Oxford, United Kingdom.

https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/2074080613_H_M_Musonda

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/M_Muya

https://www.researchgate.net/journal/1943-4162_Journal_of_Legal_Affairs_and_Dispute_Resolution_in_Engineering_and_Construction

https://www.researchgate.net/journal/1943-4162_Journal_of_Legal_Affairs_and_Dispute_Resolution_in_Engineering_and_Construction


601 | P a g e

Overcash, A.L. (2015). Introducing a novel ADR technique for handling construction disputes:

arbitration. The Construction Lawyer, Volume 35(1), pp.22-53.

Pallant, J. (2011). SPSS survival manual: A step-by-step guide to data analysis using SPSS (4th

ed.). Crows Nest, N.S.W.,Australia: Allen & Unwin.

Rwelamila, P.M.D. (2010). Construction mediation in South Africa. In Mediation in the

Construction Industry (pp. 135-146). Routledge.

Saeb, A., Mohamed, O.., Danuri, M.S.M., and Zakaria, N. (2018). Development of Alternative

Dispute Resolution in the Iranian Construction Industry. Civil Engineering

Journal, Volume 4(1), pp.11-23.

Saeb, A., Mohd Danuri, M.S.B., Zakaria, N. B., and Mohamed, O.B. (2019): A Case Study of

Dispute Resolution Methods Pertaining to the Construction Standard Form in

Iran, International Journal of Construction Education and Research, Volume

3(10), pp.1-20.

Safinia, S. (2014). A Review on Dispute Resolution Methods in UK Construction Industry.

International Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Volume

3(4), pp.105-108.

Sakate, P. and Dhawale, A.W. (2017) Dispute Resolution Mechanism in Commercial

Construction Projects: A Review. International Journal Of Engineering Sciences

& Research Technology, Volume 6(2), pp.84-88.

Salaria, N. (2012). Meaning Of The Term- Descriptive Survey Research Method. International

Journal of Transformations in Business Management (IJTBM) 2012, Volume

1(6),pp.1-7.

Salem, M.A.K. (2015). The dispute in the construction industry in the Kingdom of Bahrain with

a view to developing a dispute mitigation strategy. Unpublished Thesis, Master of

Science in Quantity Surveying, School of the Built Environment, University of

Salford.

Sarmiento, F.J.L. (2013). To litigate or to settle: Is Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) the

answer? Journal of Global Business, Volume 2(1), pp.185-205.

Sayed-Gharib, T. Price, A.D.F. and Lord, W. (2010) Improving Dispute Resolution on

Construction Projects in Kuwait‘ In: CIB2010 World Congress, Conference

Proceeding, The Lowry, Salford Quays, United Kingdom May 10th - 13th.

Sayed-Gharib, T., Lord, W. E., and Price, A. D. (2011). Barriers to alternative dispute resolution

in the construction industry: the Kuwaiti experience.IN: [Proceedings of] COBRA

2011, 12-13 September. Papers of CIB Working Commission W113-Law and

Dispute Resolution, pp.79-93.

Scherer, M. and Moss, S. (2014). ADR in Construction. Reports on Switzerland. International

Construction Projects Committee.

She, L.Y. (2011). Factors which impact upon the selection of Dispute Resolution methods for

commercial construction in the Melbourne industry: Comparison of the Dispute

Review Board with other Alternative Dispute Resolution methods. In RICS

Construction and Property Conference, September 2011, Perth, Australia (p.73).

She, L.Y. (2011). Performance of the Dispute Review Board in Melbourne Construction

projects: Is it suitable?. In RICS Construction and Property Conference,

September 2011, Perth, Australia (p.91).

Spillane, J. P., Oyedele, L. O., Evelyn, H., Von Meding, J., Konanahalli, A., Jaiyeoba, B. E., and

Tijani, I. K. (2011). Mediation within Irish construction industry: Identifying


602 | P a g e

success factors for appropriate competencies and processes. Journal of Law and

Conflict Resolution, Volume 3(8), pp.142-150.

Steven, G.H., Brady.,T.W and Patricia, A.B.(2010). Applied Survey Data Analysis .New York,

N.Y: Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.

Tanielian, A. (2012). Arbitration still best road to binding dispute resolution. Journal of Legal

Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction, Volume 5(2),

pp.90-96.

Taş, E., and Fırtına, Ö. (2015). The use of dispute review boards in construction projects: A

comparison of Turkey, UK and US.A| Z ITU Journal of the Faculty of

Architecture, Volume 12(2), pp.187-204.

Tavakol, M. and Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal

of Medical Education. 2011;2, pp.53-55.

Tazelaar, F., and Snijders., C. (2010) Dispute resolution and litigation in the construction

industry. Evidence on conflicts and conflict resolution in The Netherlands and

Germany. Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, Volume 5(16), pp.221-

229.

Tolson, S. (2017) Alternative Dispute Resolution. The Construction and Energy Law Specialists.

Construction Law Summer School 2017, Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge.

Uff, J., (2005). Construction Law. 9th ed. Sweet and Maxwell.

Williamson, O.E. (1975) Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. London:

Macmillan.

Williamson, O.E. (1996) The Mechanisms of Governance. New York: Oxford University Press.

Wong, C.H. (2011). Adjudication: Evolution of New Form of Dispute Resolution in Construction

Industry? Unpublished Research Paper, Faculty of Engineering and Science,

University of Tunku Abdul Rahman.

Yamane, T. (1967). Statistics, An Introductory Analysis, 2nd Ed., New York: Harper and Row.

Yaskova, N., and Zaitseva, L. (2017). Application of alternative dispute resolution in the field of

construction projects. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental

Science (Volume 90(1), p. 012182), October, 2017. IOP Publishing.

Yates, D.J., (1998). Conflict and disputes in the development process: A transaction cost

economics perspective. Unpublished Research Paper, Department of Real Estate

and Construction, The University of Hong Kong.

Zeidan, A. H. (2015). ADR’s Effectiveness in UAE, Is it worth it to take the Time?. Unpublished

Master Thesis in Project for Law in Dispute Resolution, Faculty of Business, The

British University In Dubai.

Zuhairah, A.A.G., Azlinor, S., and Rozina, M. Z. (2010). Alternative Dispute Resolution in the

Malaysian Construction Industry. In W113-Special Track 18th CIB World

Building Congress May 2010 Salford, United Kingdom (p.51).

Documents

FACTORS INFLUENCING USE OF ALTERNATIVE ......International Academic Journal of Information Sciences and Project Management | Volume 3, Issue 4, pp. 572-602 574 | P a g e opportunities